Geoffrey

Anyone know where to put VSTs so they load with Premiere? I have found several possible folders but none of the VSTs in them load anyway. The only ones that do are the standard Apple AU ones and they are hidden away somewhere and are not accessible. Funny thing is when I go to the Plugin manager under Audio prefs and search I can see various plugins whizz by but none ever load, only the Apple AU ones. I also tried putting some VSTs in a new folder and pointing the plugin search to that folder but got nothing. I am baffled. My machine has loads of third party VSTs (and AU plugins) installed but none of them appear in Premiere no matter what I do except the standard Apple AUs. What's the issue?

Yeah, a VST delay plugin is a good idea and worth considering for the future but also has its own issues. It isn't as simple as one file needing adjusting - sometimes it needs different adjustments within the same file and there are numerous files many of which will need copying and pasting into different timelines etc. Plus I tend to use numerous audio tracks. It is why the manual approach to each clip seemed like the simplest option and I have spent quite a long time getting the sound just right this way for around 10, 3-minute edits all in their own timeline, and only discovered the problem when I started to put the whole film together in new timeline, hence the need to copy and paste these edits. Bouncing audio down at this stage is therefore not practical as much will need to be adjusted for the full version. I tried the solution I posted above involving sending audio to Audition but it only works up to a point. And it seems quite confusing as to why it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. It also has the capacity to mess the sound up in a whole new way. So it is no good either. I am left with my original workaround - always move the audio separate from the video. I am also now making a note of the milliseconds offsets of all relevant audio clips in case of error. It is all a total pain and a very annoying malfunction of the software.

Yeah I am going deeper than that. The autosynch is very blunt and not that accurate, plus I have to move the lav mic audio by increments less than a frame to deal with the out-of-phase issue with the other mics. It is having to do this that causes the problems discussed and reveals a programming error in the software. I think you are simply sticking with the frame scale rather than using using audio units and you won't have any problems if that is good enough for you. The underlying problem is that whilst Premiere allows the use of the two scales (frames for video and time units (samples / milliseconds) for audio, when you try and move linked audio and video where the audio has been adjusted to fall between frames, it reverts back to frame movement for everything and you lose any finer audio adjustments. It's a fault.

Glad to know I am not alone! Found this possible workaround which I haven't tried yet but is fairly simple and seemingly 'fixes' the audio clip positions: https://community.adobe.com/t5/premiere-pro-bugs/quot-audio-time-units-quot-syncing-just-un-syncs-back-to-the-nearest-frame-when-i-move-my-clips-why/idi-p/13603588

I have noticed what looks like a programming error in Premiere, niche but serious. The problem occurs when you use the audio time units scale / display to fine tune the position of audio files, then try and move them with the video. Scenario: 3 mono audio tracks, two a stereo ambient pair, the other, a radio mic on the 'talent' 1 video track (with muted linked audio, used for synch only) After lining up the three linked audio clips with the video (via a slate tone), due to phasing issues it is sometimes necessary to move the radio mic clip a few milliseconds (I use the milliseconds scale rather than samples). This works fine to eliminate the problem, and my whole capture setup was designed with this possibility being needed in mind. I then re-link the three audio clips and group them with the video clip so they can all be easily moved as one unit without losing any synch. EXCEPT when you do move a group, the fine timing adjustment to the radio mic clip is lost! The software inexplicably re-aligns it with the other audio clips even though the audio time units scale is still enabled and the clips are linked and grouped. Worse, if you 'undo' it, the realignment sticks! Undo moves the group back to where it was but It doesn't undo the time realignment. Only loading a previous version gets you back to where you were. All of this occurs if you cut and past as well as click and drag This does NOT occur if you use the roll tool or close a gap in the timeline by selecting it and hitting backspace. Given that I have many edits and many 'Groups' that contain this small time adjustment of the radio mic clips, this is a very major issue for me. The only work around I have found is to de-group, move the linked audio first, then align the video afterwards. In other words if you move or cut and paste the linked audio only, the automatic software re-alignment error does not occur. Having to move audio and video independently is a real pain though and also prone to error, - any grouped video clip that you forgot to ungroup will cause the error, and remember, Undo doesn't work! I get this is a bit niche but surely having to deal with audio phasing / combing issues like this is far from uncommon? I did find a couple of people online complaining about this very problem but with no solutions. These complaints go back many years so this is not new. Anyone else noticed this, got any suggestions? I have tried all manner of solutions but only moving the audio and video separately works (as long as audio time unites is enabled, if it is not, moving these files independently will cause the re-alignment, but that is at least logical, as the timeline only has the much coarser frames scale to align with) Thanks for reading.

Thanks all, rendering at 1080p has pretty much solved the problem, even the colour issue (though could still be tweaked).

Hi, I am working on some old standard definition material (DV PAL 25fps). The quality is low but decent enough for my purposes so I did some editing, colour correction, rendered and uploaded to Youtube. The video that YT published however is awful, not only much worse quality (fuzzy, blocky), the colourspace is quite different - really dark and faces are very red (from pretty natural looking in the original rendered file). I am used to YT messing things up sometimes but this is awful. I tried various things but none with much success. Initially I rendered it as H.264 with a decent bitrate and the rendered video looked fine but YT treats this worst of all and the upload is unusable, especially regarding the colourspace which is the most red and dark. So tried rendering out as the original format (PALDV) and uploading that. It was lighter (but not enough) but the image quality drops noticeably from the rendered file. I tried adjusting the overall gamma which helped up to a point but it still looks all wrong. Colour space in Premiere sequence is Rec. 709. Maybe YT is just no good for SD material these days but has anyone any experience how to improve things? Maybe render out as HD? Not much experiences in upresing.

Yeah I get the evolution and steps forwards and sideways. With me it was more focussed on audio as I am into that. I started using a great little Juiced Link mixer for the three mics, mounted under the cam, mixing in the field and feeding it straight into the cam which worked OK and was very streamlined. But phasing issues could never be fixed that way and they irritated. So I got a zoom h5 which is great but it proved unwieldy mounted on top, so moved to the Tascam 70D (4-track), perfectly designed to mount under the camera, with a line out to the cam as backup. This works great as I can mix the three tracks in post and ironing out any phase issues and balancing. Then there's the whole story of a bespoke method of mounting the tiny DPAs and the radio mic receiver on the top of the cam. But that is even more boring! With the camera itself, I use it as it comes basically, couple of Leica lenses, camera profiles. Spent plenty of time finding the optimum settings obviously. Learnt a lot about different, efficient focussing methods. I feel generally comfortable with it all now for what I do and I can get very good sound and pretty good image.

Good point. Its funny in life in general I tend to use things till they either break or really do become prohibitively obsolete / old and in danger of breaking. Then buy new again. Just my philosophy, maybe because I find it too easy to get dragged into the 'rat race' of constant new tech awareness. Of course with computers this is really problematic because the b******* make it virtually impossible to use perfectly functioning older machines (though I am typing this on a 2011, 17" Macbook)!

Thanks all, sound advice indeed! And MrSMW totally agree about less fumbling about - I have spent the last year trying to ensure my setup incurs the least fumbling as possible, mainly so I can focus on creativity and helping the 'talent' feel easy and attended to. The biggest aim was to be able to mount the rig on the tripod then when desired, simply lift the whole thing off with one hand and carry on as before. I even sized up the dimensions of the bag so the rig can already be setup so I just have to lift it out the bag virtually ready to go.

I noticed the fan and actually this put me off a little as they can be noisy and I have mics on top of the cam. What's your experience?

S5 user here and a bit late to the party (been using the camera!) and only just aware for the S5ii. I am not much of a technical type but have enough interest to skim read through this whole topic. Cut to the chase, from what I have read I am not seeing a compelling reason at present for me to upgrade to an S5ii. Would the forum agree given what I say below? I use Cine D2 profile a lot, have little interest in LUTs and the like (at the moment anyway), find the AF on the S5 generally good enough for my needs (though something a bit more reliable in certain situations would be nice), love the image quality, look and ergonomics of the S5, still shoot mostly in HD (though guess that will change) and audio is very important. As an audio person generally I don't get why people are so excited about 96KHz as it is way OTT and unnecessary; 24bit is way more important. I mostly record audio to a Tascam device (XLR) mounted under the camera with a minijack output of it into the camera as a backup (currently on a three mic setup - COS-11D radio mic and a stereo DPA spaced pair).. My whole setup is designed so I can carry the camera with one hand and do everything alone, so the DPAs and radio receiver are mounted on top of the camera. Have the 20-60mm kit lens and a 50mm fixed one but mainly use the former for its versatility.

I am struggling to see any value in my life - if I am researching something I want to look at various sources (and really importantly, vet them) and come to my own conclusion based on the evidence, and present that evidence accordingly if need be, combined with my own reasoning. These chat bots regurgitate stuff (from wherever but presumably via someone's idea of what is reliable, but not mine), very cleverly, addressing what is asked, and that's it, as if it is 'the answer' (though may be based on rubbish but we have no idea as there is zero transparency - the potential for manipulation is huge) - the worst kind of research tool. I suppose it is OK for casual enquiry and for those who want to write bland bollocks that isn't worth writing in the first place. but we somehow seem to think is required. It would be great for political speeches and responses that sound good but say nothing and for those 'statements' put out by government and other institutions in place of actually having to face an interview.

None of this is real AI though is it? To date there is nothing thinking and feeling like humans do anyway. And that is part of its problem.

No worries it was worth a try. I am wondering ow if I can get a LUT of the Cinelike D2 profile that might help but looking online all I can see are LUTs you use with the profile not a LUT of the profile.